Quadro P620 vs GeForce 9650M GS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9650M GS with Quadro P620, including specs and performance data.

9650M GS
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 29 Watt
0.70

P620 outperforms 9650M GS by a whopping 1246% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1163464
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.6816.38
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameG84GP107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date13 March 2008 (16 years ago)1 February 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores32512
Core clock speed625 MHz1177 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1443 MHz
Number of transistors289 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)29 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate10.0046.18
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPS1.478 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs1632

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s96.13 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.16.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

9650M GS 0.70
Quadro P620 9.42
+1246%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

9650M GS 270
Quadro P620 3635
+1246%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

9650M GS 1786
Quadro P620 25105
+1306%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD3−4
−1433%
46
+1433%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−475%
21−24
+475%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−533%
18−20
+533%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%
Hitman 3 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−373%
50−55
+373%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 24−27
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−817%
55
+817%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−96.8%
60−65
+96.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−475%
21−24
+475%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−533%
18−20
+533%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%
Hitman 3 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−373%
50−55
+373%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 24−27
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−417%
30−35
+417%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−160%
24−27
+160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−96.8%
60−65
+96.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−475%
21−24
+475%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−533%
18−20
+533%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Hitman 3 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−373%
50−55
+373%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−417%
30−35
+417%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−70%
17
+70%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−96.8%
60−65
+96.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 24−27

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 9−10
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Hitman 3 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−2900%
60−65
+2900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 7−8

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 4−5

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 28
+0%
28
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how 9650M GS and Quadro P620 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P620 is 1433% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P620 is 2900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P620 is ahead in 35 tests (53%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (47%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.70 9.42
Recency 13 March 2008 1 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 29 Watt 40 Watt

9650M GS has 37.9% lower power consumption.

Quadro P620, on the other hand, has a 1245.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9650M GS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9650M GS is a notebook card while Quadro P620 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GS
GeForce 9650M GS
NVIDIA Quadro P620
Quadro P620

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.6 7 votes

Rate GeForce 9650M GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 606 votes

Rate Quadro P620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.